5 ms·

Stories like this are why I cannot in good faith donate to large charities. There needs to be more details on the inner workings on these charities, and even if

Stories like this are why I cannot in good faith donate to large charities. There needs to be more details on the inner workings on these charities, and even if they are in good faith it seems that smaller (and likely religious) organizations do the work more efficiently.

0xADEADBEE 8y ago
I've similar reservations but GiveWell [0] do some fine work in this area and I'd encourage you to at least check out their work. I'm not sure I agree with the religious part of your comment, on the basis that religious belief seems orthogonal to altruistic work. [0] - https://www.givewell.org/ https://www.givewell.org/
- shay_ker 8y ago
  What makes GiveWell better than Red Cross? I apologize if this is a "lazy internet" question, but I really don't know how to tell the difference between one charity's marketing and another.
  - seltzered_ 8y ago
    I'm currently reading William MacAskill's 'Doing Good Better' book, and to do a verry rough job of summarizing it boils down to an acts of whether the money donated to a given organization: - Has the most effect on QALY (quality-adjusted life year) per dollar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-adjusted_life_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-adjusted_life_year - Whether the organization can effectively handle money given to it (i.e. it actually can quickly scale use of it - UBI-esque things like GiveDirectly seemingly fall on the higher end of scalability but effectiveness may still be up for debate) - Givewell (when one donates to them for the discretionary grantmaking option) tries to allocate money for grants over time for what they see as the most effective grant based on their research / current needs of the organizations seeking funding. See https://www.givewell.org/about/FAQ/discretionary-grantmaking https://www.givewell.org/about/FAQ/discretionary-grantmaking for more info. Also intriguing is their 2018 giving spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EM0CCg9tvCCtEoY-QVAi6vn9EYTlL66jHgAREN1fFV0/edit#gid=236952834 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EM0CCg9tvCCtEoY-QVAi... This is my personal (and verry rough) take, honestly recommend reading the book - your local library probably has a copy in digital/audiobook formats. The book generally recommends against donating to disaster relief comparing the 2011 Japan earthquake to Haiti, though the point in that advice was largely that disasters in developed countries tend to attract more noise/news coverage than ones in other areas of the world. If you're really lazy and just want to listen to some music in this vein, try https://lostboyevsky.bandcamp.com/album/existential-risk https://lostboyevsky.bandcamp.com/album/existential-risk
prawn 8y ago
I've seen countless bad stories about small, local charities. I don't know that I'd favour them either.
- yeahitslikethat 8y ago
  It's about trust more than anything.
door5 8y ago
Issues like distaster recovery should be handled by governments, not unaccountable private charities. The issue is that the U.S. has systematically destroyed Haiti's infrastructure for nearly a century and overthrown any leader that isn't a puppet regime.
- yeahitslikethat 8y ago
  It's because they had a successful slave revolt some hundreds of years ago. It's an interesting story, too long to tell. Extremely worth researching.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- mjevans 8y ago
  This directly runs counter to the idea I was going to pitch. Send in the troops and have the Core of Engineers actually build out infrastructure and cities to bring them up to modern code in a maintainable way. Also pull in some locals for education in how that stuff is done in the process and try to do knowledge transfer of "This is how you build civilization that does not get flattened by a hurricane." Given the political history, I doubt that would go well. Is there a foreign military power with a similar skill set that could do this task?
  - Joakal 8y ago
    Why does it need to be military? IIRC, Australia sent police, specialists as part of post Iraq war efforts. US could send in fact send non military; engineers, etc, but it will viewed with local suspicion and may make things worst (assaults, sabotage by either side or third party). Even US is suspicious of foreigners building US infrastructure (ie Huawei). When there's so much distrust of US by Haitians and US likewise doesn't trust Haitian government with funds, there are quasi government organisations such as UN: https://www.un.org/un70/en/content/70ways/index.html https://www.un.org/un70/en/content/70ways/index.html Even they have had issues in Haiti.
yeahitslikethat 8y ago
How many did Habitat for Humanity make? I would expect they have among the highest houses per donated dollars. Jimmy Carter, former U.S. President, founded habitat for humanity.
- mysterydip 8y ago
  From what I can gather, it's not a simple answer as they do more there than just build houses. There's infrastructure upgrades and mortgage assistance and even work on who owns what piece of property. Some stats for FY18 from https://habitathaiti.org/ https://habitathaiti.org/ : 665 infrastructure projects 683 homes repaired 2139 jobs created
Simple_Guy 8y ago
Stories like this are why I do not donate to charities at all. It is just too hard to verify that my money isn't going to pad some dictator's pocket.
- mcv 8y ago
  Not giving anything is no solution either, but we definitely need more accountability for charities. This is part of that, I guess, but we also need to know which charities are effective. I'm sure that information is around somewhere too.
  - Simple_Guy 8y ago
    It is a solution though.
  - JetSpiegel 8y ago
    > Not giving anything is no solution either You can always pay taxes.
- imtringued 8y ago
  It's this problem all the way down. You cannot verify that the charity is doing things properly. The charity cannot verify that the subcontractor is doing things properly. The subcontractor cannot verify that his employees in the foreign country are doing their job properly and then finally even they cannot verify that the locals who they are helping are actually those who need it the most.

0xADEADBEE 8y ago

I've similar reservations but GiveWell [0] do some fine work in this area and I'd encourage you to at least check out their work. I'm not sure I agree with the religious part of your comment, on the basis that religious belief seems orthogonal to altruistic work. [0] - https://www.givewell.org/ https://www.givewell.org/

shay_ker 8y ago
What makes GiveWell better than Red Cross? I apologize if this is a "lazy internet" question, but I really don't know how to tell the difference between one charity's marketing and another.
- seltzered_ 8y ago
  I'm currently reading William MacAskill's 'Doing Good Better' book, and to do a verry rough job of summarizing it boils down to an acts of whether the money donated to a given organization: - Has the most effect on QALY (quality-adjusted life year) per dollar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-adjusted_life_year https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality-adjusted_life_year - Whether the organization can effectively handle money given to it (i.e. it actually can quickly scale use of it - UBI-esque things like GiveDirectly seemingly fall on the higher end of scalability but effectiveness may still be up for debate) - Givewell (when one donates to them for the discretionary grantmaking option) tries to allocate money for grants over time for what they see as the most effective grant based on their research / current needs of the organizations seeking funding. See https://www.givewell.org/about/FAQ/discretionary-grantmaking https://www.givewell.org/about/FAQ/discretionary-grantmaking for more info. Also intriguing is their 2018 giving spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EM0CCg9tvCCtEoY-QVAi6vn9EYTlL66jHgAREN1fFV0/edit#gid=236952834 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1EM0CCg9tvCCtEoY-QVAi... This is my personal (and verry rough) take, honestly recommend reading the book - your local library probably has a copy in digital/audiobook formats. The book generally recommends against donating to disaster relief comparing the 2011 Japan earthquake to Haiti, though the point in that advice was largely that disasters in developed countries tend to attract more noise/news coverage than ones in other areas of the world. If you're really lazy and just want to listen to some music in this vein, try https://lostboyevsky.bandcamp.com/album/existential-risk https://lostboyevsky.bandcamp.com/album/existential-risk

prawn 8y ago

I've seen countless bad stories about small, local charities. I don't know that I'd favour them either.

yeahitslikethat 8y ago
It's about trust more than anything.

door5 8y ago

Issues like distaster recovery should be handled by governments, not unaccountable private charities. The issue is that the U.S. has systematically destroyed Haiti's infrastructure for nearly a century and overthrown any leader that isn't a puppet regime.

yeahitslikethat 8y ago
It's because they had a successful slave revolt some hundreds of years ago. It's an interesting story, too long to tell. Extremely worth researching.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
mjevans 8y ago
This directly runs counter to the idea I was going to pitch. Send in the troops and have the Core of Engineers actually build out infrastructure and cities to bring them up to modern code in a maintainable way. Also pull in some locals for education in how that stuff is done in the process and try to do knowledge transfer of "This is how you build civilization that does not get flattened by a hurricane." Given the political history, I doubt that would go well. Is there a foreign military power with a similar skill set that could do this task?
- Joakal 8y ago
  Why does it need to be military? IIRC, Australia sent police, specialists as part of post Iraq war efforts. US could send in fact send non military; engineers, etc, but it will viewed with local suspicion and may make things worst (assaults, sabotage by either side or third party). Even US is suspicious of foreigners building US infrastructure (ie Huawei). When there's so much distrust of US by Haitians and US likewise doesn't trust Haitian government with funds, there are quasi government organisations such as UN: https://www.un.org/un70/en/content/70ways/index.html https://www.un.org/un70/en/content/70ways/index.html Even they have had issues in Haiti.

yeahitslikethat 8y ago

How many did Habitat for Humanity make? I would expect they have among the highest houses per donated dollars. Jimmy Carter, former U.S. President, founded habitat for humanity.

mysterydip 8y ago
From what I can gather, it's not a simple answer as they do more there than just build houses. There's infrastructure upgrades and mortgage assistance and even work on who owns what piece of property. Some stats for FY18 from https://habitathaiti.org/ https://habitathaiti.org/ : 665 infrastructure projects 683 homes repaired 2139 jobs created

Simple_Guy 8y ago

Stories like this are why I do not donate to charities at all. It is just too hard to verify that my money isn't going to pad some dictator's pocket.

mcv 8y ago
Not giving anything is no solution either, but we definitely need more accountability for charities. This is part of that, I guess, but we also need to know which charities are effective. I'm sure that information is around somewhere too.
- Simple_Guy 8y ago
  It is a solution though.
- JetSpiegel 8y ago
  > Not giving anything is no solution either You can always pay taxes.
imtringued 8y ago
It's this problem all the way down. You cannot verify that the charity is doing things properly. The charity cannot verify that the subcontractor is doing things properly. The subcontractor cannot verify that his employees in the foreign country are doing their job properly and then finally even they cannot verify that the locals who they are helping are actually those who need it the most.